Action in spite of Uncertainty

This is an excellent piece from the Financial Times about the uncertainty surrounding climate change. It goes to great lengths to spotlight areas of agreement and areas where the evidence is less clear (e.g., it's pretty much a given that we'll experience a 1.5C rise in temps, but not so clear cut on 4C).

If you don't have time to read the whole article, skip to the last paragraph:

Meanwhile, concentrations of airborne carbon increase year on year. Once carbon is in the atmosphere, it can stay there for a century, continuing its warming effect. The problem is that if action is delayed until these areas of uncertainty are resolved, the world may find it is too late.

I've written about this before. The whole point of dealing with climate change is to manage our exposure to risk despite the uncertainty.

Gotta act, gotta act, gotta act right now

I had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Julia Slingo from the UK's Met Office this week. She was in Washington for a couple of days on business. I participated in only a couple of her meetings but walked away with a renewed sense of purpose. It's always good to talk with an expert who can communicate lastest developments in climate science so effectively. It's also a reminder that, despite all the political distractions and white noise that tends to consume an outsized portion of the policy debate, we need to act urgently before we reach a breaking point.

Communicating risk and uncertainty

Excellent op-ed in today's Guardian. Key quote comes at the end:

. . . despite the climate scientists' best efforts at scepticism, it simply has not been possible to rule out the risk of the sort of climate changes discussed above.

Handling uncertainty is key to the scientific method, but, conversely, the existence of uncertainty is not itself cause for inaction.

This is a critical point. There is no way we can have 100% certainty about what the world will look like in 2050. But there is an enormous body of evidence, reinforced by a recent Met Office study, that suggests the need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is more urgent than ever. By the time we have 100% certainty, it'll likely be too late.

Why the Science Matters

There's been an enormous amount of chatter recently about climate change science. It started last year when computer hackers stole thousands of emails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and has continued in light of recent revelations that a small number of projections in the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were inaccurate or not properly peer reviewed.

But neither event should take away from the fact that, despite all of the media coverage, and all of the sceptical arguments used in the aftermath of the UEA and IPCC developments, the overwhelming fundamentals have not changed - that climate change is happening and “man-made greenhouse gas emissions are very likely to be the cause”.

We are changing the level of CO2 in the atmosphere at an unprecedented rate. This significant shift is leading to changes taking place right now (e.g., Arctic sea ice melt, Greenland glacial melt, and increased ocean acidity). These are not potential impacts 20, 50, or 100 years from now, but changes happening in real time.

The latest review published by the Met Office Hadley Centre and other UK and international climate experts lends further support to these assertions. It shows the evidence for man-made climate change is even stronger now than when the IPCC carried out its last assessment in 2007.

So, do we just stand idly by and wait to see what happens? Or do we take concrete, pragmatic steps to fix the problem? If you haven't guessed by now, I say we choose the latter. Over the next few weeks, GreenMachine2050 will focus on what specific steps can be taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), improve energy security, and create new low carbon economic future.

I know. It's going to be awesome. So stay tuned.